The new court of public opinion

“The new court of public opinion is a basketball court. Everyone gets their own ball (opinion). Everyone plays by the rules they consider fair.”

In 2015, a pharmaceutical executive named Martin Shkreli hiked AIDS drug prices by 5,000 percent. Of course the media had a field day — here was an un-ambiguously unlikeable guy being an un-ambiguous douche to AIDS patients. There was hardly a need to influence public opinion here.

The hitch? Due to all the negative exposure he received, Shkreli faced extreme difficulty finding an impartial jury this year, for unrelated charges of fraud.

From a Harper’s transcript of jury selection:

The court: “The purpose of jury selection is to ensure fairness and impartiality in this case. If you think that you could not be fair and impartial, it is your duty to tell me. All right. Juror No. 1.”

Juror No. 1: “I’m aware of the defendant and I hate him.”

Benjamin Brafman, Shkreli’s lawyer: “I’m sorry.”

Juror No. 1: “I think he’s a greedy little man.”

The court: “Jurors are obligated to decide the case based only on the evidence. Do you agree?”

Juror No. 1: “I don’t know if I could. I wouldn’t want me on this jury.”

The court: “Juror No. 1 is excused.”

What’s the court of public opinion?

“Innocent until proven guilty” is, technically, our standard.

Traditionally, a judge decides what evidence to allow and a jury of peers decide upon a verdict. Personal feelings, outside knowledge, and pressures from friends and family expressly should not factor into this verdict. Legal cases are not meant to be argued outside of the courtroom, or decided on gut and bias.

The informal court of public opinion has operated alongside our legal system for decades. The term is used to describe advocates on both sides of an issue using media to influence public opinion, and in turn, the jurors and verdict. The courts are well aware of this issue: Juries are selected carefully and sometimes cloistered during trials to try to avoid the influence of public opinion.

In 2017, we reached a vital landmark with Shkreli’s difficulty finding a jury of unbiased peers. With the rise of social media platforms and the 24-hour news cycle, we’re able to saturate public opinion.

Media storms surrounding trials are not unusual. Consider the coverage surrounding the Rodney King beating, the O.J. Simpson trial, and Trayvon Martin’s shooting. In each scenario, the media curated evidence and expert opinions, encouraging people outside of the courtroom to become a shadow jury. They elevated the importance of viewers’ individual opinions on the accused’s guilt or innocence.

Disbelief in the evidence, the judgment, or sometimes the court itself became the story.

Traditionally, trust in the courts has been strong enough for citizens to accept official judgments, even if they disagree. But over the last decade, backlash after judgments that the informed public see as “incorrect” has been increasing.

Remember the shock that followed the Zimmerman acquittal, or when the death of Casey Anthony’s adorable daughter was not avenged? The media, in both cases, extensively covered dissenting opinions from the public.

A jury is asked to hand down a verdict on very specifically worded charges, only referring to evidence that has specifically allowed. Convinced of our own opinions, it is easy forget that the jury is not being asked simply “guilty or not guilty.”

This isn’t inherently a problem. But each decision that the public is groomed to reject can fuel the decline of faith in justice through the courts.

2018: predicting a retreat from fact to opinion

In 2017, the court of public opinion became a diaspora, and personal opinion officially supplanted data and evidence. We’ve left the model of the traditional court, with a commonly accepted set of evidence, behind.

The new court of public opinion is a basketball court. Everyone gets their own ball (opinion). Everyone plays by the rules they consider fair.

It’s fucking madness.

In 2017, a new journalistic standard has been set. The court of public opinion may be invoked to build support for issues that cannot be decided in a court of law. Winning the war for public opinion is tantamount.

Vice, Vox, CNN and a host of other media organizations flooded the state of Alabama with reporters ahead of December’s Senate election. The overwhelming question? “Is Roy Moore a man of god or a child molester?”

I am sitting in a cafe in Los Angeles right now, listening to a group of women explain how they know certain men who have been accused of sexual harassment are guilty, and how they know other’s aren’t.

“He’s a personality. They’re always going to look for oppo research.”

“Now they’re digging into everybody. Looking for everything.”

The problem here is not that these women have formed opinions. The problem is that, increasingly, media organizations are serving as the judge, deciding which evidence to uphold or dismiss.

Worse, they’ve recruited us all as players in their jury. Suddenly, having a defensible opinion is the point. Not truth, or justice.

This is an unhealthy and unsustainable trend.

Using public opinion for good

The court of public opinion is not inherently evil, and there are scenarios that should be argued in the public rather than cloistered in private arbitration. Elements of the #metoo discussion highlight the value of public deliberation. Since redress mechanisms across industries proved unable to justly resolve complaints of sexual harassment and sexual assault — the media was right to step in.

  • Transparently formed definitions: The definitions and weight of sexual harassment and sexual assault are not commonly agreed upon. Arguing the issue in the media can help the public reach common definitions and avoid talking past each other.
  • Cooperatively formed norms: The high visibility processing of those accused can helped cement changes in policy and behavior. Companies across industries are revising harassment reporting policies.
  • Shines light on miscarriage of justice: Media organizations can shine light when existing redress mechanisms are corrupt or opaque. For example, when those with money and influence, like Harvey Weinstein, are held to different standards of justice or protected by allies.

Using public opinion for evil

Journalists and media organizations should carefully police their interventions in public opinion for the following negative effects.

  • Wedging and polarization: Asking if Roy Moore is a saint or predator forces a person to choose an extremely polar side, and occasionally to defend the indefensible. We all probably agree pedophilia is abhorrent, but reporters ask supporters to defend pedophilia alongside Moore.
  • The death of complexity: Forcing people to choose simplistic “sides” reduces complex issues to binary choices. Instead of examining opinions on individual evidence or the nature of specific charges, increasingly media organizations are asking for a thumb up or down on the “villain” in the storyline. When we gloss over complexity we push decision-makers towards overly simplistic solutions, or inaction.
  • The substitution of opinion for fact: When facts are unknown or complex, but a yes or no answer is required immediately, the public is driven increasingly to go with a gut instinct or opinion. Dismissing fact for opinion is more comfortable than changing your worldview — the behavior can be self-reinforcing.

Holding media organizations accountable

Convening the court of public opinion is both an important public service and a dangerous trend in discourse.

In the court of public opinion, media organizations play the stewards of evidence, the prosecution and the defense. As we enter 2018, it is important for these actors to understand the impact of this role upon both individual opinions, collective understanding, and resulting policy.

Caitria O’Neill is a UX designer and researcher, formerly at Facebook.

Helen Havlak   Keywords, not publishers, power the world’s biggest feeds

Ariana Tobin   Too tired to tap

Kinsey Wilson   Facebook and Google: Help out or pay up

Basile Simon   We need better career paths for news nerds

Mike Caulfield   Refactoring media literacy for the networked age

Frédéric Filloux   External forces

Felix Salmon   Covering bitcoin while owning bitcoin

Mira Lowe   The year of the local watchdog

Lanre Akinola   Making noise is not a strategy

Juleyka Lantigua-Williams   Women of color will reclaim and monetize our time

Jennifer Brandel and Mónica Guzmán   The editorial meeting of the future

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen   The Snapchat scenario and the risk of more closed platforms

Borja Echevarría   TV goes digital, digital goes TV

Alfred Hermida   Going beyond mobile-first

Hossein Derakhshan   Television has won

Mariano Blejman   News games rule

David Skok   Finding an information-life balance

Craig Newmark   Working together toward sustainable solutions

Jennifer Coogan   The future is female

Nicholas Diakopoulos   Fortifying social media from automated inauthenticity

Matt Boggie   The intellectual equivalent of the Dead Sea

Michelle Ferrier   The year of the great reckoning

Molly de Aguiar   Good journalism won’t be enough

Jarrod Dicker   Honesty in advertising

Miguel Castro   The arrival of the impact producer

Elizabeth Jensen   Show your work

Dan Newman   A return to trust

Renée Kaplan   The year of quiet adjustments (shhh)

Nikki Usher   The year of The Washington Post

Dan Shanoff   You down with OTT? (Yeah, DTC)

Mario García   Storytelling finally adapts to mobile

Heather Bryant   Building the ecosystems for collaboration

Matt DeRienzo   A recession, then a collapse

Eric Ulken   The year local publishers get smart(er) about change

Julia Beizer   A longer view on the pivot

Mariana Moura Santos   Think local, act global

Alan Soon   The rise of start of psychographic, micro-targeted media

Tim Carmody   Watch out for Spotify

Usha Sahay   Wallets get opened

Joanne Lipman   Journalists inventing revenue streams

Jake Levine   The return to now

Matt Thompson   Here come the attention managers

Paul Ford   Go global

John Keefe   Scooped by AI

Ray Soto   VR reaches the next level

Rachel Schallom   Better design helps differentiate opinion and news

Sue Schardt   Jump the niche

Mary Walter-Brown   Show a little vulnerability

P. Kim Bui   The reckoning is only beginning

Tracie Powell   The muting of underserved voices

Damon Krukowski   Reviving the alt-weekly soul

Hannah Cassius   The year of the echo-chamber escapists

Trushar Barot   The Jio-fication of India

Caitlin Thompson   Podcasting models mature and diversify

Mi-Ai Parrish   Blockchain and trust

Jessica Parker Gilbert   Design connects storytelling and strategy

Almar Latour   Conquering calm

Monique Judge   Letting black women tell their own stories

Rodney Benson   Better, less read, and less trusted

Jared Newman   Venture funding and digital news don’t mix

Sam Ford   The year of investing in processes

Will Sommer   The year local media gets conservative

José Zamora   Revenue-first journalism

Federica Cherubini   The rise of bridge roles in news organizations

Francesco Marconi   The year of machine-to-machine journalism

Claire Wardle   Disinformation gets worse

L. Gordon Crovitz   Serving readers over advertisers

Pablo Boczkowski   The rise of skeptical reading

Betsy O'Donovan and Melody Kramer   Skepticism and narcissism

Nicholas Quah   Stop talking trash about young people

Charo Henríquez   Training is an investment, not an expense

Dheerja Kaur   Fun with subscription products

Burt Herman   Things get real

Joanne McNeil   Gatekeeping the gatekeepers

Alastair Coote   The year of self-improvement

Amie Ferris-Rotman   More female reporters abroad (please)

Kim Fox   Audience teams diversify their approach

Justin Kosslyn   The year journalists become digital security experts

Manoush Zomorodi   Self-help as a publishing strategy

Andrew Ramsammy   The year ownership mattered

Vanessa K. DeLuca   Women’s voices take center stage

Sara M. Watson   Feeds will open up to new user-determined filters

S. Mitra Kalita   The arc of news and audience

Doris Truong   Computer vision vs. the Internet vigilantes

Caitria O'Neill   The new court of public opinion

An Xiao Mina   Memes and visuals come to the fore

Andrew Losowsky   The year of resilience

Kristen Muller   The year of the voter

Rubina Madan Fillion   Unlocking the potential of AI

Yvonne Leow   The rise of video messaging

Mandy Velez   texting is lit rn, fam

Amy Webb   Listen to weak signals

Juliette De Maeyer   A responsible press criticism

Imaeyen Ibanga   Longform video leads the way

Lam Thuy Vo   Breaking free from the tyranny of the loudest

Jacqui Cheng   Retailers move into content

Emily Goligoski   Looking beyond news for inspiration

Nathalie Malinarich   Peak push

Rachel Davis Mersey   AI, with real smarts

Amy King   Let’s amplify visual voice

Steve Grove   The midterms are an opportunity

Corey Johnson   The pro-fact resistance

Mary Meehan   Real lives are at stake in rural areas

Neha Gandhi   Filler killers

Monika Bauerlein   The firehose of falsehood

Daniel Trielli   The rich get richer, the poor scramble

Errin Haines Whack   At the ballot, it’s time to count black women

Edward Roussel   Eyes, ears, and brains

Sarah Marshall   Loyalty as the key performance indicator

Christopher Meighan   Passive partnership is in the rearview

Adam Thomas   Sharing is caring: The year of the mentor

Feli Sánchez   The year for guerrilla user research

Ståle Grut   Reclaiming audience interaction from social networks

Luke O'Neil   The end is already here

Susie Banikarim   R.I.P. Pivot to Video (2017–2017)

Evie Nagy   Pivot to mobile video frustration

Bill Keller   A growing turn to philanthropy

Kawandeep Virdee   Zines had it right all along

Carrie Brown-Smith   Transparency finally takes off

Vivian Schiller   Pivot to tomorrow

Kathleen McElroy   Building a news video experience native to mobile

Kelsey Proud   No, no, no

Marcela Donini and Thiago Herdy   Collaboration is the way forward for Brazilian journalism

Valérie Bélair-Gagnon   Seeking trust in fragmented spaces

Michael Kuntz   The only pivot that might work

Dannagal G. Young   Stop covering politics as a game

Kyle Ellis   Let’s build our way out of this

Jassim Ahmad   Thriving on change

Joyce Barnathan   It will be harder to bury the news

Jim Moroney   Newspapers have to be good enough for readers to pay for

Lucas Graves   From algorithms to institutions

Jamie Mottram   From pageviews to t-shirts

Jennifer Choi   Standing up for us and for each other

Umbreen Bhatti   The trust problem isn’t new

Cory Haik   Suffering from realness, pivoting to impact

Zizi Papacharissi   Women come back

Andrew Haeg   The year journalists become relationship builders

Nancy Watzman   Know thy TV

Ruth Palmer   Risks will grow for news subjects — especially minorities

Eric Nuzum   Beyond the narrative arc

Debra Adams Simmons   And a woman shall lead them

Niketa Patel   Live journalism comes of age

Cristina Wilson   The year of the Instagram Story

Julia B. Chan   Looking for loyalty in all the right places

Alice Antheaume   Are you fluent in AI?

Corey Ford   The empire strikes back

Jesse Holcomb   Information disorder, coming to a congressional district near you

Raney Aronson-Rath   Transparency is the antidote to fake news

Rodney Gibbs   Tech workers turn to journalism

Emma Carew Grovum   Newsroom culture becomes a priority

Aron Pilhofer   We can’t leave the business to the business side any more

Tanya Cordrey   Finally, the seeds of radical reinvention

Ernst-Jan Pfauth   Publishing less to give readers more

Richard J. Tofel   The platforms’ power demands more reporters’ attention

Sally Lehrman   Trust comes first

Jim Brady   With the people, not just of the people

Laura E. Davis   Writing answers before you know the question

Pia Frey   Address users as individuals

Matt Carlson   Attacks on the press will get worse

Marie Gilot   No assholes allowed

Sydette Harry   Listen to your corner and watch for the hook

Raju Narisetti   Mirror, mirror on the wall

Rick Berke   Value is the watchword

Tamar Charney   We get serious about algorithms

Millie Tran and Stine Bauer Dahlberg   (Hint: It’s about your brand)

Cindy Royal   Your journalism curriculum is obsolete

Alexios Mantzarlis   Moving fake news research out of the lab

C.W. Anderson   The social media apocalypse

Tanzina Vega   It’s time for media companies to #PassTheMic

Pete Brown   Push alerts, personalized

Michelle Garcia   Navigating journalistic transparency

Brian Lam   Sketchy ethics around product reviews

Carlos Martínez de la Serna   The new journalism commons

Taylor Lorenz   Social and media will split

Nushin Rashidian   Publishers seek ad dollar alternatives

Sam Sanders   Shine the light on ourselves